Welcome to HVAC-Talk.com, a non-DIY site and the ultimate Source for HVAC Information & Knowledge Sharing for the industry professional! Here you can join over 150,000 HVAC Professionals & enthusiasts from around the world discussing all things related to HVAC/R. You are currently viewing as a NON-REGISTERED guest which gives you limited access to view discussions

To gain full access to our forums you must register; for a free account. As a registered Guest you will be able to:

Participate in over 40 different forums and search/browse from nearly 3 million posts.

Absolutezero, Good question. Fortunately, this has not happened. I think that once the next nuclear weapon is used, it will lead to the end of life on our planet. As the most powerful and prosperous nation, we should not be the nation to start what will surely be a downward spiral.

To answer your question, if I were the one to make the decision, I would only use nuclear weapons if there were absolutely no other choice. Biological attack-no. Crude nuclear attack by a terrorist-no. Nuclear attack by another nation-maybe.

Originally posted by bigtime Absolutezero, Good question. Fortunately, this has not happened. I think that once the next nuclear weapon is used, it will lead to the end of life on our planet. As the most powerful and prosperous nation, we should not be the nation to start what will surely be a downward spiral.

To answer your question, if I were the one to make the decision, I would only use nuclear weapons if there were absolutely no other choice. Biological attack-no. Crude nuclear attack by a terrorist-no. Nuclear attack by another nation-maybe.

What do you think?

"And I will break the pride of your power", comes to mind.
I've said before that I don't see how a country that can't execute mass murderers without endless appeals and candle-holding can launch a nuclear attack that will kill millions of "innocent" civilians. I can see us going to the U.N. and asking for their permission which of course would never come. With someone like Kerry at the helm, that is exactly what the response would be. I sure am glad I don't have to push the button or make that decision. If I did, I'm sure it would be very unwise.

Originally posted by bigtime Absolutezero, Good question. Fortunately, this has not happened. I think that once the next nuclear weapon is used, it will lead to the end of life on our planet. As the most powerful and prosperous nation, we should not be the nation to start what will surely be a downward spiral.

To answer your question, if I were the one to make the decision, I would only use nuclear weapons if there were absolutely no other choice. Biological attack-no. Crude nuclear attack by a terrorist-no. Nuclear attack by another nation-maybe.

What do you think?

You show a naive knowledge of weaponery yet you would
use nuclear weapons. Very dangerous indeed.
Gen. Curtis Lemay firebombed Tokyo and killed many
more people that the Hiroshima bomb . What would your decision have been??
On Okinawa nearly 300,000 people died fire bombed in caves
while Nagasaki A bomb killed 75,000.
A Biological attack in the right place could kill 2+ million
people. Far more than a targeted nuclear strike.
Your "I think that once the next nuclear weapon is used, it will lead to the end of life on our planet." shows a complete lack of knowledge. Study the above ground tests in
the Pacific, particularily the French Hydrogen Bomb tests.
Its still there. Learns about this.
We will use nuclear weapons against the these people, if
only to save out lives within the next 5 years.

Originally posted by bigtime Absolutezero, Good question. Fortunately, this has not happened. I think that once the next nuclear weapon is used, it will lead to the end of life on our planet.

Your "I think that once the next nuclear weapon is used, it will lead to the end of life on our planet." shows a complete lack of knowledge. Study the above ground tests in
the Pacific, particularily the French Hydrogen Bomb tests.
Its still there. Learns about this.
We will use nuclear weapons against the these people, if
only to save out lives within the next 5 years.

You might be right. The key phrase in bigtime's reply I believe is "will lead to". Pandora's box kind of thing. As you know, other nations now have nukes, etc. unlike during WWII. Their response to our response might come into question. Alliances might form to our detriment, etc.

Who will challenge us

The blood is on their hands. These governments know they are harboring terrorist. They know our resolve. The million of innocent deaths are their responsibility! Khaddafi knew this and reacted positively to it!! One good nuke in downtown Baghdad would save quite a few American lives. American lives are the only ones that I personally care about. The rest are totally insignificant!!

Re: Who will challenge us

Originally posted by rob10 The blood is on their hands. These governments know they are harboring terrorist. They know our resolve. The million of innocent deaths are their responsibility! Khaddafi knew this and reacted positively to it!! One good nuke in downtown Baghdad would save quite a few American lives. American lives are the only ones that I personally care about. The rest are totally insignificant!!